News

Council says no to Chick-Fil-A

Mountain View's City Council voted 4-2 Tuesday evening against allowing a Chick-Fil-A to open at 1962 El Camino Real, saying that a drive-through restaurant would be at odds with visions of a bike- and pedestrian-friendly city.

With as many as 60 to 100 hungry drivers an hour entering its drive-through, council members said Chick-Fil-A would be in conflict with bicyclists and pedestrians on a portion of El Camino Real where several have been killed by cars. They also said the drive-through would be too close to an apartment building, where residents could be exposed to higher levels of tailpipe emissions.

"We just finished our general plan," said council member Jac Siegel of the blueprint for the city's development until 2030. "It is all about sustainability. We worked on it over several years and this just flies in the face of that to me."

Council member Ronit Bryant echoed Siegel's comments about the city's vision for El Camino Real. "When we were talking about bus rapid transit, we all got quite excited about the thought of bike lanes. Having a use based on cars just doesn't make sense."

Council members Tom Means and John Inks supported the drive-through, while Mayor Mike Kasperzak was absent.

Chick Fil-A may still apply to open a restaurant without a drive-through.

"We need to deliberate on that," said Blake Goodman, senior manager for Chick-Fil-A, after the meeting. "A lot of things are still up in the air."

Chick-Fil-A officials had told the council that a drive-through was needed to make the store financially viable.

A number of Chick-Fil-A supporters spoke, saying the store would provide valuable first jobs, and that the store would fund youth sports and other community programs.

The owner of 1962 El Camino Real, Kathy Lin, was in tears at the end of the meeting with a crowd of Chick-Fil-A supporters around her. She told the council that the Sizzler there now was refusing to pay "market rent" for the site and that it had become a financial burden on her family. "We could not tenant anyone else," Lin said. "Only Chick-Fil-A or a 24-hour Denny's. We don't have much choice."

Zoning administrator Peter Gilli had previously approved the project, citing no real opposition at the time, and the fact that being closed Sunday would reduce drive-through impacts. The decision was appealed to the City Council, by not one, but two groups.

The first appellant, David Speakman, had raised the $1,000 appeal fee on wepay.com overnight, noting Chick-Fil-A's funding of anti-gay rights groups. But Speakman and his husband Richard focused entirely on land-use issues on Tuesday night, as did everyone else. City officials noted that "free speech issues" could not be taken into consideration.

"As a city, we have decided to be bicycle-friendly," Speakman said. "People lining up and looking for a break in traffic or a green light, probably aren't going to be looking for pedestrians as much."

Alarmed by the line forming at the drive-through of the new San Jose Chick-Fil-A, residents of the Gemello neighborhood south of El Camino Real organized against the drive-through.

"We don't see this as trivial -- people are going to seek chicken through our neighborhood," said Gemello resident Stephen Friedman.

Neighbors and City Council members were also surprised that no traffic study had been done for Clark Avenue and other neighborhood streets south of El Camino Real. Gemello residents and Los Altos High School students would be driving to and from Chick-Fil-A through the neighborhood on their lunch hour, especially on Clark Avenue.

"I don't want my son exposed to crazy-driving teenagers in a hurry to get chicken for lunch," said a father of a student at nearby Almond elementary school.

"The question comes down to, do we really want more drive-throughs in the city," said the second appellant, Bruce England. "There are already 26, this would be 27."

He held up pictures of the city that are used to promote Mountain View on its website, and noted that not one was of a drive-through. Then he showed pictures of how the city's "grand boulevard" vision for El Camino Real might look, with taller, denser buildings and vibrant street life. "It's not anti-business, cars are able to get through there, it looks like a place you would want to go through, it looks like a destination."

While a plant-covered trellis would cover the drive-through lane, and Chick-Fil-A made assurances that noise would be tolerable and promised double-paned windows for neighbors, council members said they had to imagine feeling comfortable living in the apartment building right next to the drive-through. Siegel said smog levels could be 10 times the average around drive-throughs, according to a study he read.

Resident Joyce England said the drive through would put "car exhaust next to rooms with children who can't control their environment."

One resident said the noise levels might be tolerable on average, but that doesn't account for "that one V8 Mustang that comes through every hour, revving its engine."

Chick-Fil-A supporter and City Council candidate Jim Neal responded to the concern, saying, "As the owner of two V8 Mustangs, we don't just rev our engines only at drive-throughs, we also do it at stoplights and on Highway 101. That is what V8 Mustangs are for, thank you."

Council member Tom Means explained his support of Chick-Fil-A by saying that it would be hard to develop much else on such a property.

"We've had a lot of silly comments about why drive-throughs are bad," Means said. "But we really have not vetted that with any other alternatives."

There was much discussion about how the narrow lot created a circulation problem.

"I don't know how you get in and out of that parking lot if you've got that line in the way," said council member Margaret Abe-Koga, referring to a line of cars likely to extend into the narrow parking lot, waiting to place orders at the drive-through. "It just seems like too much happening in this small space."

As part of the project, a new shared driveway with the neighboring strip mall would have been built, allowing a new El Camino Real stoplight at Clark Avenue. A Chick-Fil-A consultant said it would resolve an unsafe situation, as the intersection allows unprotected left turns onto El Camino Real where 14 preventable accidents have occurred in the last five years, said public works director Mike Fuller. But council members and others opposed having a stoplight 550 feet from one at Escuela Avenue, and some said the danger could be addressed by allowing right turns only.

"Do we really want to have signals every 550 feet?" asked council member Laura Macias.

"Typically no, you don't want to have one every 550 feet," said public works director Mike Fuller. "That is definitely a consideration."

Posted by Yah But
a resident of Castro City
on Oct 17, 2012 at 12:24 pm

I never see lines of cars backed up at all hours in front of apartments, hotels or office buildings.
If the business cannot survive without a drive through, one must question the viability of its future.

Posted by Neighbor
a resident of another community
on Oct 17, 2012 at 1:11 pm

Heard about this as we often eat at Sizzlers.

I am not a fan of drivethrus unless it is snowing and freezing, which we don't get here.

I like what Tom Means is quoted as saying and suspect that the arguments against the drivethru are much more likely to be veiled comments against their religious affilliations rather than the drive thru aspect. Cars are going to use a parking lot and need to come out in traffic whether or not they have used the drive thru or parked and walked into the store. I expect the residents of the nearby apartments will actually appreciate the fact that they have an empty parking lot on Sundays rather than notice whether or not there is a car idling in the drive thru line.

I hope that they come back with a park only option and still get permission to open.

Posted by drive through
a resident of Old Mountain View
on Oct 17, 2012 at 1:20 pm

You can find numerous examples up and down the peninsula of drive throughs creating huge traffic headaches. The problem is that car drivers wait in line and the lines snake out of the parking lot and on to the street, blocking traffic. This never happens when diners have to park and get out of their cars. If the parking lot is full, they will find a parking place down the street instead of waiting in line.

Ironically under the guise of a "Grand Boulevard", our Council is dooming El Camino to be a continued mess of rundown or abandoned shops, seedy businesses like the Alibi or the adult video store, and other generally failing businesses. They're basically saying that if you're likely to be successful, then you're not welcome because that may bring traffic. The reality is that there are no businesses like "Ronit and Siegel's Walk-up Vegan Shakes" looking to open in place of Sizzler (and if they did, they wouldn't succeed). The more vibrant the businesses on El Camino (regardless of what type), the more likely it is that El Camino will someday be this "Grand Boulevard".

The Council needs to focus on:
1) Being pro-business to bring in tax revenue (look at our costs -- we need tax revenue to avoid being like Stockton or other cities)
2) Make Castro St. the real "Grand Boulevard" of Mountain View. Already having trouble supporting businesses on one street (e.g. the grocery store claims to be struggling)
3) Safety -- the accidents with cars+pedestrians are on streets like California, not El Camino
4) Crime -- plenty of burglaries in Mountain View, despite our well-funded police department

Instead, they get hung up on one more drive-thru or plastic bags. What a waste!

I'd like to see a recall for all but Means and Inks. Need some sanity in Mountain View. If others are interested, we should organize one ASAP.

Posted by A Wolf dressed as a Lamb ?
a resident of Old Mountain View
on Oct 17, 2012 at 1:32 pm

Zoning administrator Peter Gilli had previously approved the project, citing no real opposition at the time, and the fact that being closed Sunday would reduce drive-through impacts. The decision was appealed to the City Council, by not one, but two groups.

The first appellant, David Speakman, had raised the $1,000 appeal fee on wepay.com overnight, noting Chick-Fil-A's funding of anti-gay rights groups. But Speakman and his husband Richard focused entirely on land-use issues on Tuesday night, as did everyone else. City officials noted that "free speech issues" could not be taken into consideration.

Posted by LOL
a resident of Old Mountain View
on Oct 17, 2012 at 2:18 pm

One resident said the noise levels might be tolerable on average, but that doesn't account for "that one V8 Mustang that comes through every hour, revving its engine."
This resident spends Her/His time standing at drive throughs just to see how often " that one V8 Mustang" orders Chicken just to rev its engine ? Who needs a traffic study with citizens like this ?

Posted by Nadyne
a resident of Old Mountain View
on Oct 17, 2012 at 2:21 pm

Jim, I read the article and understood the joke (and it got a bit of a chuckle). Given that your intent came through loud and clear, I don't think that you should assume that there is some kind of vendetta.

Posted by Jim Neal
a resident of Old Mountain View
on Oct 17, 2012 at 2:21 pm

By the way, for those of you that are tired of the City telling us how many restaurants we can have and where, what type of bags we can use, and everything else they can ram down our throats in the name of "The General Plan", I have started a petition to have the donated portions of the Berlin Wall installed on City Hall Plaza as a reminder of what happens when the government controls every aspect of our lives. If you want to sign the petition here is the link:Web Link

Posted by Jim Neal
a resident of Old Mountain View
on Oct 17, 2012 at 2:25 pm

Nadyne, I'm glad you understood, but if you take all of Debolt's articles about me as a whole, it is clear that he has some kind of problem with me. Even when I provided him with written responses, he rewrote what I said.

Posted by Jerry
a resident of Shoreline West
on Oct 17, 2012 at 2:32 pm

This "excuse" of opposition based on a drive-thru is just a lame attempt to pacify the so-called "open minded" folk who oppose Chick-Fil-A based on political reasons. If CFA was pro-gay you can bet everyone would've welcomed a drive-thru with open arms. Those same "chicken crazed" teenage drivers are still on the roads an dthis does not improve bicycle safety one iota. In-N-Out has a drive-in right next to apartment complexes and I don't see any complaints about them.

This "argument" is complete garbage. I feel sorry that the owner of the building is being victimized by Sizzler and now the political agenda of the truly closed-minded folks who bullied the spineless city council into caving.

Shame on all who had a hand in this. I'm sure you feel proud that you defended Mountain View against the evil empire.

Posted by Drive-Through babe
a resident of Cuesta Park
on Oct 17, 2012 at 2:38 pm

So I guess the city council is going to begin discussion on how to enact a vote to close down Taco Hell and Jack-in-the-Crack? I'm pretty sure there might be at least one other restaurant with a drive through access from ECR, but I can't think of it off the top of my head. I'm still trying to come out of the daze of stupid stupid our fine city council is hoping I get lost in.

Posted by gcoladon
a resident of Slater
on Oct 17, 2012 at 2:42 pmgcoladon is a registered user.

@Jim Neal,

I think journalists generally print the most newsworthy comments, in their opinion. And the one about the Mustangs was a lot more memorable than your other comments, unfortunately (though I still remembered them, as they were good points). It drew a good laugh from the crowd, which I would assume is what you were aiming for.

I would be shocked if there were anything more to it than that. For other references, see "binders of women" or "Big Bird"

p.s. Do you actually own two of the same make and model of car? Or was that part said in jest as well?

purely arbitrary decision or deliberately denying because of CHick-fil-a's controversial position on gay marriage. anyone with an ounce of common sense would know that it is more to do with the controversy that Chick-Fil-A generated. I guess freedom of expression doesn't apply to everyone. Now Imagine if McDonald's or Starbucks' comes out some such controversial position. Politicians at all levels of our ogvt are liars and thieves of the worst kind. MV city council is no different. shameless and foolish residents of this town voted for these crooks who are running our city.

Posted by gcoladon
a resident of Slater
on Oct 17, 2012 at 3:00 pmgcoladon is a registered user.

@The elephant in the room,

I guess we can never know what thoughts people truly have going through their minds in a case like this. We can only go by their actions and their words. I certainly hope that all the council members didn't internally consider issues that can not be considered, but there's no way to know, now is there? There was certainly a kabuki-esque quality to the proceedings, what with the absence of said room-elephant.

I would have liked to see and hear all the councilmember's deliberations with my own eyes and ears, but after spending 5 hours and 45 minutes in those chambers, I had to call it quits at 10:15 PM :) Hopefully I'll catch it on video.

Truth be told, the site is question is a very difficult site, and not the one you would pick for a drive through if you were CFA and had your choice of sites. I feel the same way about the site with the In-N-Out at Grant and ECR; that is one terrible drive through configuration. In my car, it often requires a K-turn to make the turns in the line!

I think it would be great if CFA found a less impacted/compromised site somewhere else in MV, and reapplied. They are certainly a better asset to the community than most of the other 26 drive throughs in MV.

On a related note, I don't think we should start acting as if MV residents are about to abandon their use of cars in the near future, no matter what the 2030 General Plan or some regional planning or transit agency says.

Posted by relocated southerner
a resident of Old Mountain View
on Oct 17, 2012 at 3:32 pm

This is a huge disappointment for me. I have been looking forward to this Chik Fil A for as long as they have been discussing adding one in MV. I find all of the arguments about traffic, noise, and safety to be filters and excuses, since the opposition didn't start until CFA made national headlines as anti-gay marriage. I agree with other commentators that El Camino is no grand boulevard, and in my opinion, CFA would be a good REGIONAL drive through option on El Camino that isn't a Jack in the Box or In and Out Burger. CFA is one of the few drive through restaurants that I would actually go to, and shame on everyone who stereotypes "the type of people who go to drive-throughs." Living in OMV, I do my share of walking and cycling, and I am also the person who would go to CFA! I hope CFA does explore a no-drive through option, otherwise, I'll just keep DRIVING over to San Jose (so much for the city council's advocacy for environment) and SPENDING my money there (so much for keeping money here in the city). BAD MOVE CITY COUNCIL!

Posted by long time MV resident
a resident of Shoreline West
on Oct 17, 2012 at 4:10 pm

As one who worked extremely hard compiling facts on this CUP the appeal I was involved in was purely honest. Our objection to this business on this site was clear long before the stories appeared in the news. The appeal was not taken lightly by any means and there was no ulterior motive whatsoever. This was quite simply the wrong business for the wrong site at the wrong time, end of story. I will be very happy if CFA is able to find another home without a drive through in our city and I never understood why this site was selected. I visited several locations during the research phase and found them to be superior in design to the average fast food restaurant. On the same note I hope the property owner is able to find a suitable business for her site. The time put into the appeal process was overwhelming. I understand it must be easy for some to now sit on the sidelines and speculate that there was more to this but there was not.

Posted by Jim Neal
a resident of Old Mountain View
on Oct 17, 2012 at 4:15 pm

-- GColadon, Yes my prior comment was removed. So much for free speech! I guess some people can say whatever they like about me and not have the article corrected, but if I try to say something in my defense, it gets deleted.

Posted by Not New To This
a resident of Waverly Park
on Oct 17, 2012 at 4:26 pm

Reading the terms use I don't see how someone would be confused that this was a free speech msg board.

Anyone who has the misunderstanding that this site isn't owned by a private entity who can do whatever they want with whatever post they want is _sorely_ mistaken.
There is no free speech on internet msg boards...never has been...anywhere!
Wait, I bet there were attempts and they just filled up with spam ads. Don't know for sure, but that's what would happen in about 3 minutes.

Posted by gcoladon
a resident of Slater
on Oct 17, 2012 at 5:17 pmgcoladon is a registered user.

@long time MV resident,

Thank you for your post, you seem sincere and sound honest to me. I am always glad to hear citizens getting involved, and trying to help make the community better, according to whatever values they may have. Much better than apathy, no matter what values the person has.

I would like to ask if you might expand on your sentence which began, "I will be very happy if CFA is able to find another home without a drive through in our city"

It sounds like you wouldn't be very happy if CFA found another home in our city that had a drive through? Why is that? CFA does happen to be a 'drive through restaurant business', not unlike In N Out.

Posted by Jim neal
a resident of Old Mountain View
on Oct 17, 2012 at 6:34 pmJim neal is a registered user.

Just for the record, I do own two Mustangs but they are different years and I drive far less than Anyone on the city council and less than any of my opponents in the race, it's amazing how concerned some of them are and yet they won't give up thier cars!

Posted by Trisha
a resident of another community
on Oct 18, 2012 at 1:58 pmTrisha is a registered user.

Ridiculous! Come on! There is an In & Out Burger, as well as a Jack and the Box establishment off of El Camino. BOTH DRIVE THROUGH. Perhaps, people would like the option of a Chick-Fil-A establishment to go. The employees are quite friendly and the food is much better. Whether or not there was a drive through, I would make the trip from LG to MV to order my favorite.

Posted by Scott Lamb
a resident of Monta Loma
on Oct 18, 2012 at 2:55 pmScott Lamb is a registered user.

It's nice to see that the city council is being consistent about their Grand Boulevard Initiative. But it seems like it might be off to a rough start given this paragraph:

"""
The owner of 1962 El Camino Real, Kathy Lin, was in tears at the end of the meeting with a crowd of Chick-Fil-A supporters around her. She told the council that the Sizzler there now was refusing to pay "market rent" for the site and that it had become a financial burden on her family. "We could not tenant anyone else," Lin said. "Only Chick-Fil-A or a 24-hour Denny's. We don't have much choice."
"""

Either the city council is having trouble getting businesses to believe in the effort or Kathy Lin thinks "market rent" is much higher than it actually is.

Posted by David
a resident of Blossom Valley
on Oct 18, 2012 at 3:12 pmDavid is a registered user.

Scott Lamb -- the issue is that El Camino in Mountain View is dotted with empty buildings, for lease signs, sketchy businesses, and businesses that won't succeed. That doesn't make for a "Grand Boulevard", and drives down the market rate for leasing for everyone.

The Council is naive to think they can pick-and-choose their way to a Grand Boulevard. And ironically they are denying the very businesses that are most likely to succeed, based on the argument that they will generate too much business!

They should support any business that is likely to thrive; this will in turn drive up market rates for leases, bring in more businesses, create natural densification, and in turn create more of a "Grand Boulevard".

But the Council (other than Inks and Means) have little/no business background, and clearly don't understand economics.

A "vision" without a realistic plan is worthless. Meanwhile, we have Castro that could actually be a "Grand Boulevard", but the Council spends their time worrying about a chicken joint on El Camino. Why would any business want to set up shop in Mountain View with these clowns at the helm?

Posted by DavidR
a resident of another community
on Oct 18, 2012 at 4:54 pmDavidR is a registered user.

Hey, it's not just the Grand Boulevard idea. Something was fishy with that whole application, and I don't mean any publicity stunt free speech gay marriage issue.

Don't feel so bad for the property owners. They only bought the property back in 2007. Their speculation will eventually pay off. The parcel immediately behind separating Sizzler from Latham changed hands in April of this year, for about $1M. Combine the two properties and put the driveway through to Latham and the whole picture changes. The sizzler property with or without a light at El Camino is not big enough by itself to host a drive through. It doesn't have enough connection to El Camino to keep traffic from backing up getting to the proposed Chick Fil A development. That's why the market value of the parcel and its market rent is less than the current owner's would like. If they bought the parcel behind the combined vallue of the two properties would go up. Similarly if it was consolidated with the strip mall next door, and even better on down to include the Cost Plus strip mall and the Escuela corner, things would change too. The speculation on the property value increase isn't going to pay off within 5 years. Boo hoo.

Posted by Darin
a resident of another community
on Oct 19, 2012 at 11:32 amDarin is a registered user.

Re: "Why would any business want to set up shop in Mountain View with these clowns at the helm?"

It isn't just Mountain View. A few years ago, a study found that the direct costs of regulatory compliance to California's small businesses exceeded their tax burden. The indirect costs are even higher.

I'm not saying that there shouldn't be any regulation, but if we want to promote small businesses, then we need to consider the regulatory environment in addition to taxes.